Warburg's metabolic theory is an important part of current cancer care and many prospective efforts. However, tumor metabolism is an effect, not a cause. The si

Warburg's metabolic theory is an important part of current cancer care and many prospective efforts. However, tumor metabolism is an effect, not a cause. The simple-as-possible-but-no-simpler model of cancer is that mutations occur, breaking the blueprint code for cellular processes. In most cases this leads to cell death. In rare cases, the mutant survives and either fails to interpret a death signal or over-interprets a growth signal, or the growth switch is constitutionally activated. This leads to more mutations and some number of daughter lineages also survive. This all stems from very straight forward underlying rates of mutation predicted by the laws of thermodynamics, requiring no other input. There are plenty of example problems available to work through on Rosalind.info. That is, cancer is a disease of information. And this is extremely compatible with the genomic evidence in every cancer we've encountered, many, many times over. Viruses you say? They insert into the genome and interfere with normal cell processes. UV radiation. Chemical exposures, oxidative stress, etc, etc. Those are intermediary chains of causation. Interesting for specific examples (wear gloves, wear sunscreen, be careful about sex, etc). One of the blueprints that tends to fall apart is the complex aerobic respiratory pathway, including the Kreb's cycle, etc. But there are other, usually latent energy pathways, like glycolysis, that are available. It is the loss of aerobic respiration that unmasks the glycolysis pathway and all its associated inefficiencies and metabolic stress effects.